redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 19, 2003 05:53 PM
 Edited By: redelk on 22 May 2003 18:34
Dyno Run Question - HP up/Torque down
Below are 3 runs I did while at DG events. Run #3 was done two years ago when the engine had around 16K miles on it. The other two were done last week. Run #6 was before we remapped and Run #11 was after. The engine has about 41K on it now.
All of the runs were on the same dyno with the same operator. The only difference was #3 had a CF of 1.05 and the other two had a CF of 1.03. Also, we drained out some oil after #6, since I had overfilled it during a recent oil change.
Though 182.27 is nothing to sneeze at when the engine has that many miles on it, 94.76 ft/lbs is about 5 ft/lbs less then what I would expect when the HP is over 180. The best torque numbers we got out of six runs was 95.33.
Yes, the bike is much smoother after the remap (as shown in the 5500 to 6000 range), but here's a comparison between #3 (first numbers) and #11 (second numbers)...
RPM.....HP.....Torque
4500 - 64.27/59.45 - 75.05/69.41
5000 - 77.70/73.75 - 81.63/77.47
5500 - 81.96/84.40 - 78.26/80.59
6000 - 87.65/90.05 - 76.63/78.83
6500 - 110.05/109.14 - 89.74/88.19
7000 - 121.60/117.54 - 91.24/88.20
7500 - 134.77/131.64 - 94.40/92.21
8000 - 146.43/142.80 - 96.16/92.78
8500 - 153.90/149.90 - 95.10/92.63
9000 - 161.31/159.80 - 94.17/93.28
9500 - 168.51/166.38 - 93.17/91.99
10000 - 174.61/171.82 - 91.75/90.28
10500 - 174.01/176.97 - 87.04/88.52
11000 - 173.15/177.96 - 82.69/84.99
11500 - 171.80/180.34 - 78.46/82.36
#3 176.59 HP @10,122 RPM / 97.35 ft/lbs @7,742 RPM
#11 182.27 HP @11,650 RPM / 94.76 ft/lbs @ 7,767 RPM
At 10,280 RPM, both runs were at 175.22 & 89.52
So what's the deal? Why are the HP numbers UP and the torque numbers down? Engine age? Correction factor? Dyno operator? Almost every dyno run I've seen that the HP was around 180+, the torque was between 98 and 99. Is there a problem here?
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
   
|
TedG
Moderator
Posts: 8222
|
posted May 19, 2003 06:45 PM
Well here is the deal, as rings start to wear they lose tension against the cyl walls and therefore less friction, hence the extra hp, but on the other hand there is a slight loss of compression hence the loss of torque.
____________
Ted
2000 Green ZX12 sold
The fast color!!
Green 2005 ZX10R
2009 Concours Black ABS
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 19, 2003 07:08 PM
Edited By: redelk on 19 May 2003 20:10
When I checked the compression prior to run #3, it was 181~179. Prior to run #11, it was 175 on all 4. Does that little of a difference make that much of a torque loss?
frEEk, it doesn't seem to work as a link either. What are my options? Even though I could not veiw previous pic posts, Dave said he could see them. WTF?
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
your car is slow
Needs a job
Fuck Nitrous...Got Boost?
Posts: 4089
|
posted May 19, 2003 08:49 PM
Even a coolant temperature change of 20 or 30 degrees could make a 5hp difference.
Ive seen my bike make 10hp difference between when it was at the 8 oclock position..and the 9oclock position on the temp gauge.
____________
Do not taunt happy fun ball!
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted May 19, 2003 09:07 PM
It seems like Torque likes more fuel and HP Likes less fuel
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
ZHooligan
Moderator
Post Whore Extraordinaire!
Posts: 3829
|
posted May 19, 2003 09:50 PM
yes indeed
____________
To those who do not count their life in years, but in how life
has touched them in the past and how much it can hold in the
future; -- Youth is forever.
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 20, 2003 06:33 AM
Before the remap, the bike was very rich, but the torque numbers were even lower. Using 13.0 as a target (still a tad richer than 13.2), the torque numbers went up a couple, but still short of the 98 or 99.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
TedG
Moderator
Posts: 8222
|
posted May 20, 2003 07:06 AM
Compression at 400 RPM and 10,000 RPM are different animals, especially as the the engine gets more hours.
____________
Ted
2000 Green ZX12 sold
The fast color!!
Green 2005 ZX10R
2009 Concours Black ABS
|
ZHooligan
Moderator
Post Whore Extraordinaire!
Posts: 3829
|
posted May 20, 2003 08:42 AM
Pretty hard to have something make the same power it did in it's prime as the miles keep rolling on. Essentially every moving part is wearing out. And like Ted said there is a difference between 400 rpm and 10,000.
And I can also say that YCIS comments about coolant temps etc. is corect. And dyno's do vary, and factors like the air cleaner can be a problem. You could essentially have a cleaner or dirtier air cleaner. Less or more air, the quality of air etc. And yes the dyno software tries to corect for all of this but it is not perfect. Is the elevation at the GAP compareable to your home town?
One thing I like about our dyno is we are at an elevation of about a 120 feet above sea level.
____________
To those who do not count their life in years, but in how life
has touched them in the past and how much it can hold in the
future; -- Youth is forever.
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 20, 2003 06:16 PM
Okay, from what I have read here and after talking to a local engine builder, I think I've figured out ALL the factors that could possibly explain the loss in torque. Ya'll need to tell me if I'm on the right track or not.
FACTORS THAT I FEEL DON'T APPLY
1. Air filters, oil level, etc. - All of these were equal in both cases. The filters were cleaned and oil was changed just prior to the runs. Same would apply to the coolant, sparkplugs, chain and sprockets, tires and so on. In other words, the bike was gone over completely a few days prior to all the runs.
2. Dyno and operator were the same.
3. Location of dyno (portable DJ250) - even though the location was not the same, the altitude difference was less then 300 feet between the dealership/DG event HQ (run #3) and the operator's shop (runs #6 & #11)
NOTE: All runs were done in the Knoxville, TN area.
Location: Alcoa Good Times +35.8454/-83.9955
Run #3 - 5/19/01 at 19:01:58 Conditions - 87.95F / 28.75 in. Hg. CF=1.05
Location: Performance Psycle +36.1492/-83.9494
Run #6 - 5/14/03 at 14:31:00 Conditions - 76.24F / 29.01 in. Hg. CF=1.03
Run #11 - 5/14/03 at 16:22:08 Conditions - 77.76F / 28.92 in. Hg. CF=1.03
FACTORS THAT MIGHT HAVE AN EFFECT
1. Chain Tension/Tire Brand - this one is kind of a stretch, but might have a minor influence.
2. Coolant/Oil/Engine Temp. - I'm sure this might have an effect, but the 4 runs done in '01 ranged from 96.84~97.93. In the '03, 5 of the premap runs ranged from 92.07~93.36 and the 6 post map runs ranged from 94.29~95.33 (smoothing set @ 3). I will admit that the higher numbers were attained in the first to middle runs of each group.
3. Altitude and weather conditions
4. A/F Ratio - The new map is leaner then both the '01 and '03 premap runs. My engine builder buddy implied that addition fuel can actually act as way of boosting compression as it helps seal the gaps between the rings and cylinder walls (if I understood him correctly). The only problem with this is why wasn't the torque numbers higher on the premap runs, if the A/F was richer then the post map runs?
5. Correction Factors - would the 1.05 CF be more "generous" then a 1.03 CF? Again, all of the 12R runs I have seen where the HP was 180+, the torque was always in the 98~100 range, no matter what the CF was. Not that I have seen more the a dozen or so, but still, I feel that's enough to give me an idea of what I should expect. Especially when my bike once produced numbers close to that previously.
FACTORS THAT LIKELY HAD AN EFFECT
1. Ring Wear - from what I read here, less compression=less torque
2. Carbon Build Up on the Valves - this could really have something to do with. The engine builder said that carbon build up can create havoc with the smoothness of the flow of fuel into the cylinder and even act as a "sponge", absorbing some of the fuel as it's tries to flow into the cylinder.
If there is a build up on the valves (quite possible after 41K, no matter how good the gas I used was), the remap might not be worthless, but it would hardly be accurate after the valves were cleaned of carbon build up. He qualified his theory by saying that it might not be as applicable with the 12R engine as say, a BMW car engine, but he felt it could be a contributing factor (as well as ring wear).
THE BOTTOM LINE
IMHO, The two major possibilities of the torque drop are ring wear and carbon build up. Ring wear is something I have little to no interest in trying to address. It's just not worth the effort for those few extra ft/lbs on a bike that is not used for competition purposes.
If I remember correctly, someone had stated that they found significant carbon build up on the valves during an engine tear down. Am I dreaming this up or is this a true statement?
If so, is it really worth me tearing down the head to get the valves cleaned? Could this be part of the reason the valve clearances have gotten tighter? Is there an easier method to clean them or should I just blow it off until I trade the bike in when the ZX10R arrives, sometime early next YEAR?
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
TurboBlew
Moderator
BUSY DOING THE SCHIAVO
Posts: 4590
|
posted May 21, 2003 03:33 AM
Sherm, have you ever run Redline FI cleaner through the fuel system?
How about the fuel filter? Ever changed it?
____________
Official Charter Member of the RIDERS OF KAWASAKI MEMBERSHIP REVOCATION CLUB
Also a BadAss Internet Forum Moderator 4 Hire!! Come at me brah!
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 21, 2003 06:01 AM
No & no. Where can I find Redline FI cleaner and why should I use it? Change the fuel filter? Where will I find the filter and what is the part number? I can't find it in the parts diagrams.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted May 21, 2003 07:27 AM
You might think about the fuel pump and a degradation of fuel pressure as well. The fuel filter is on the pump assembly. You can use any commercially availble FI cleaner like Chevron Techroline. I do that periodically, never noticed any difference in the bikes but I have on the Dodge. My opinion is that you rings seal has finally gotten as good as it gets. Do a leak rate and prove that.
Doug
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 21, 2003 10:21 AM
Edited By: redelk on 22 May 2003 18:45
My dealer said that he will loan me his Motion Pro leak rate testing gauge, but the instructions for it are missing.
From what I can tell, the procedure is similar to doing a compression check. At least as far as putting the gauge's hose in the sparkplug hole. I also know that compressed air is applied to the gauge (no more then 60 psi, according to the gauge's faceplate).
I haven't had their general manager explain the process to me, but I figure that the service manual pretty well spells everything out and what the specs should be. If not, I'll have a kazillion questions for ya'll tomorrow.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
jonwright
Needs a job
Posts: 2416
|
posted May 22, 2003 05:55 PM
quote:
** Snip ** If not, I'll have a kazillion questions for ya'll tomorrow.
Oh God, NOT THAT!!!!
|
aliveagain
Needs a life
Posts: 5033
|
posted May 22, 2003 06:07 PM
I've heard of spraying a water mist down the intake of a warmed over engine.Hold the rpm to around 5k and spray the water until it bogs down and almost stalls.repeat on next cylinder.I'ld double check with some real mechanics first.I've used that method befor on my Harleys
____________
I wondered why the baseball kept getting bigger. Then it hit me.
|
kcadby
Pro
Posts: 1733
|
posted May 22, 2003 06:51 PM
Red...
IF you can get the engine EXACTLY at TDC of the compression stroke (timing mark, right end of engine) you can then plug in the air to the leak tester and get a reading...
(your TDC mark will be off as much as your timing is advanced...if you have an adjustable advancer) 
IF you DON'T get it EXACTLY at TDC...the engine WILL TURN when you plug in the air...DO NOT have a wrench on the motor when you plug the air in!!!
Wrench WILL "go around" half a turn (if not FLY OFF) when the motor turns!!!
A lot of people just plug in the air then turn the motor forward until the intake valves close and hold it to get a reading on the gauge but...I prefer to get it at TDC before pluging in...
I had a friend back home that could not ever seem to find the true TDC so the motor wouldn't turn over when he pluged in the air
DON'T try to hold the motor (wrench) when you plug the air in...I can assure you that...60PSI on the piston can HURT YOU if you try hold the motor from turning if it's NOT on TDC when you hook up ther air...
|
Bikelover
Novice Class
Posts: 64
|
posted May 22, 2003 06:59 PM
Sherm,
Another possible explaination is cam chain stretch retarding the cam timing.
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 22, 2003 07:37 PM
Edited By: redelk on 22 May 2003 20:42
kcadby, I don't have a timing advancer. I just did the "Y2K timing mod" to the pick up. I still am using the stock bolts to hold the pick up in place and from what I remember, it was good for approximately 2 to 2.5 degrees.
Since that's the case, wouldn't the TDC mark be accurate? If not (even though I can't see how), that'd mean two years worth of compression checks would be off too, wouldn't?
Figuring that it would be correct, is the test done with the engine warm, like when checking the compression?
Hmmmmm, Bikelover.... Sounds like a possibility. Still, there really isn't any practical way for an idiot like myself to check for such a condition, is there?
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
kcadby
Pro
Posts: 1733
|
posted May 24, 2003 04:03 PM
Timing has nothing to do with compression...
Yes your TDC mark will be accurate with your set up...
You can check it warm AND cold if you want to...
One of the things about checking it warm is...you would be SHOCKED at how fast valves seats can rust in high humuidity areas of the world...
IF you test it cold and have any leak-down through any of the valves (put ear up to muffler, and also listen to air box with air plugged in) you might find that most of the valve leakage will go away after you run the motor because...it beats the rust of the valves/seats...
I once rode a friends Z1 to my shop...left it INSIDE over-night then...took the head off the next day to build him a motor and...the freekin valve seats were rusted!?!?!?
That was MANY years ago but...I will never forget it...
Humidity in Fl. is unreal...(my shop was less than 5 miles from the ocean)...
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted May 28, 2003 07:02 PM
Haven't done the leak rate test, but I have a question about correction factor numbers. What does a CF number of 1.00 mean and why would a lower nuber be comsidered even better?
One of my post remap runs had the following readings/results
77.37F - 28.94 in Hg - CF=1.00 (est. alt. 1100')
SAE - 181.28 HP - 95.14 ft/lbs
UNC - 176.02 HP - 92.33 ft/lbs
One of the runs 2 years ago read like this
87.95F - 28.75 in Hg - CF=1.05 (est. alt. 950')
SAE - 176.59 HP - 97.48 ft/lbs
UNC - 167.41 HP - 92.41 ft/lbs
Why did the difference of 250', 10.58F and 0.19 in Hg create such a big difference in the CF numbers? A run on a local DJ150 had conditions of 96.33F - 29.46 in Hg but a CF of just 1.03.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
jonwright
Needs a job
Posts: 2416
|
posted June 02, 2003 06:39 PM
Something else to consider: Found this at Dale Walker's Holeshot web site under the ZZr1200 link:
"Be aware, that dynos, dyno operators, conditions and bikes can vary 3-8 hp, so this should only be used as a reference for before and after results. Dynojet 250 Dynos now commonly used, usually read about 7 to 9 % higher than a 150 model. "
|
ZHooligan
Moderator
Post Whore Extraordinaire!
Posts: 3829
|
posted June 02, 2003 08:00 PM
We try to tell people this over and over and over agian. And over and over and over it is always the same, "i don't understand" My bike made more last time i dyno'd it in North Dakota", "Your dyno's junk", etc.etc.etc. The same bike on the same dyno on three consequtive days will likely show three different max horsepowers. Factor in different fuels (your local gas station has no guarantee that there fuel is even from the same source. It all falls within a range), weather conditions, humidity, temp. etc. will effect things. And yes the dyno works at correcting for some of this but ultimately things are different.
If you look for example at Formula USA racing. They control things via horsepower. The 600 class allows a max of 115 horsepower at the rear wheel, the 750 class allows 145 hp. The teams tune and test and check the bikes throughout the days of practice and on race day to make sure they will be within the rules. The rider goes out and sets a track record in qualifying and the bike is dyno'd for compliance. It show 116 horsepower so the guy's lap record evaporates, and he is no longer on the pole but at the back. His team detunes the bike some more to make sure he won't be over the limit. The rider goes out the next day, as the race starts the clouds cover the sun, the air cools the rider wins and his bike is dyno'd and bam it shows 116.2 hp. How? Same dyno different day, different conditions. Oh buy the way the dyno uses acceleration as part of its measurement, take a new tire and compare it against a worn out (less rubber left) and you have less rotating mass, more acceleration, take into consideration chain ware (notice the metal flakes you find in the grease under your countershaft sprocket cover?) another change however subtle. Sometimes this may all equate to a couple of tenths worth of hrsepower, sometimes more. Last year I participated and watched track records set and lost at various tracks that found us spending most all of our time detuning the bike. Trying to map for 2 or more horsepower below the limit in hopes of taking care of the rider. So dyno's do vary.
To many people want to bet their life on the dyno and horsepower numbers. Look for a range and if you are in that range you are OK. Otherwise you will find yourself in the rut of owning something that you don't dare ride or use as it does wear out you know!! One of the main reasons I quit buying black cars because I went crazy trying to keep it scratch free and shiny!!
____________
To those who do not count their life in years, but in how life
has touched them in the past and how much it can hold in the
future; -- Youth is forever.
|
redelk
Moderator
Please... speak to the hand.
Posts: 3212
|
posted June 02, 2003 08:51 PM
Does the same apply to torque numbers? It's just that when compared to all of the other 180+ bikes that have used this same dyno (different days and conditions), like Harry and Dave, their torque numbers were closer to the 100 mark.
I also thought it was the other way around when comparing a 150 to a 250. It was always the 150 that was a "little happy" with the numbers.
____________
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games.
-Ernest Hemingway
|
ZHooligan
Moderator
Post Whore Extraordinaire!
Posts: 3829
|
posted June 02, 2003 09:06 PM
Edited By: ZHooligan on 2 Jun 2003 22:22
I can't vouch for the 150 versus 250. We own a 250 and people complain about their bikes not making as much horsepower on ours as they did on other dyno's. I would think the 250 is more accurate but Can't say for certain.
What's interesting is your uncorected torque number is pretty close to the same. How does your bike compare Harry and Daves as far as chain and tire goes? Tire size, air pressure etc.? If they are running a lighter tire then you they will likely get a better reading. Wheel wights? A Dunlop 208 versus a 207 is 1.5 pounds lighter for example. Was you rear wheel properly aligned? And the other fun one is the rear axle nut that has been tightened to holy heck. As silly as it all sounds it also can be attributed to the suspension as well. Tire slippage will effect the run as well. And another question is did you have the ZX7 swing arm on? If you did and the dyno operator didn't catch it your rear tire was in a significantly different spot then Harry and Dave's. Under acceleration the tire could have been touching the housing in front of the drum or loading itself differently. Did they strap the rear of the bike down? We don't unless the customer wants it, but some people do.
Just some thoughts.
____________
To those who do not count their life in years, but in how life
has touched them in the past and how much it can hold in the
future; -- Youth is forever.
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC